DISCOVERY: ....beyond doubt that it was from the same time of Christ's death..

"Same time" means nothing, IMO.

John 19:23,24 When the soldiers had crucified Jesus, they took his clothes and divided them into four shares, a share for each soldier. They also took his tunic, but the tunic was seamless, woven in one piece from the top down.

So they said to one another, "Let's not tear it, but cast lots for it to see whose it will be," in order that the passage of scripture might be fulfilled (that says): "They divided my garments among them, and for my vesture they cast lots." This is what the soldiers did.

No doubt his robe was 'unique' (for the time period) and costly. Not only the fabric itself but it was ONE PIECE and that one piece would be WIDE - it was a tunic. They may claim what a standard cloth for that day was but there was nothing standard about Jesus's robe. We read they wouldn't tear it and cast lots because of it's value and uniqueness. If it were 'standard' for the day, who would want it and tearing it would be of no consequence.

When I read about the separate piece of linen in the article, I remembered the Scripture because many years ago, a man versed in the tradition back then said - when you are in someone's house for dinner and you plan on COMING BACK, your take your dinner cloth, fold it and placed it aside. Same as He did in the tomb. To me, that's the Good News!

SIDENOTE: As much as I would love for unbelievers to have proof - so, they too, will believe. The Word says otherwise. "Faith comes from hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ". That's the way I came to The Lord - through His Word and didn't need proof of anything. Proof only lasts until something else comes along to put doubt on that proof. I believe searching for proof is a smoke screen and harmful for unbelievers - Faith is the key and then they will be open for the supernatural truth.

Well, no. Of course not, but wide warps are very rare and noteworthy. Weaving wide warps is expensive and requires more skill and time than narrow ones.

Linen is not stretchy. It poses a lot of problems in weaving; warp threads break easily. A wide loom takes up a lot more space, is harder to put a shuttle through.

#######################

1. Have you seen the huge old Chinese brocade looms—2 person operated . . . about as long as a semi? They toured the USA 20-30 years ago. Certainly the Chinese had a variety of wider looms. I assume other cultures did, too.

2. Wide looms would have indicated a larger investment in the enterprise in terms of space and yarn. The loom itself is not that much more complicated being wider.

3. What does “very rare” mean in what context? 1 out of 5; 1 out of 10? 1 out of 100? within 10 square blocks? within 100 square blocks? Within a city? Within 3 cities?

4. I have 300-400 warp thicker cotton threads on my loom currently . . . each thread a ball of yarn maybe 1,000 or so yards long. Weaving width is 25”. I don’t think a warp 50” wide would be much more trouble if my loom happened to be that wide—particularly with a boat shuttle.

5. Yeah, linen takes some special care. Tightly spun fine thread linen spun very well may not be as likely to break as some not spun so well. And, dampening the linen helps.

6. Looking at ancient Chinese weavings as well as some from other culture . . . I just do not doubt that such a fabric could have been available to the richer folks in the Middle East 2,000 years ago.

7. For all we know, Joseph of Aramathea may have had such a weaver in his own employ or household.

If you want to know weaving in the time of Christ, you should check out Egyptian art from well before A.D.--you'll see that the common way to weave was to dig a hole, sit on the edge of that hole with the loom's bottom braced at one's feat. The common way to weave is not that different from the frame looms of the modern-era Navajo, with looms standing like a door before the weaver.

Silkworm cultivations and jacquard looms in Israel at the time of Christ? Lol. Why not spinning wheels, too?

Rare means what has survived with mummies, which give a pretty good picture of textile cultivation and production in Israel at Christ's time.

They need to take a sample from the textile that is not part of a repair.

Well, then, you are well aware why the large ones are so very pricey, and rare.

Why look for the uncommon way to weave, when the Bible is rich in textile lore?

It's possible that a large loom in Christ's time could have woven a textile like the Shroud. It's just unlikely, because a textile of that size and quality, that lasted 2000 years, would attract just as much attention as the image found upon it.

Can we say FOR CERTAIN how such a head cloth might have been used vis a vis the long shroud type cloth?

Not for certain... but the Jewish burial custom was to place a cloth binding under the jaw, behind the ears and up, tied over the crown of the head, to keep the mouth closed in death. The Sudarium(sweat cloth) of Oviedo (named for the Cathedral it's kept in since the sixth Century AD on Oviedo Spain), shows signs of having first covered the head of a man who was crucified, then used to cover his face while being carried in a face down position with a hand over his face (bloody hand print), and then being rolled diagonally like a kerchief into a rope like form that would be long enough to tie around a head to do service in just such a manner "about the head" as described in the Gospel.

Thanks for the excellent fact-based commentary. Its striking to see how superior your understanding of this topic is to that of the professional journalist who cobbled together this article.

Thank you... it comes from thirty years if study and following the science... and not accepting things at face value. This for example is based on work done TEN YEARS AGO... and is merely being trotted out again as if it is all new.

The claims about Jesus death certificate being found on the Shroud are also not new... and are more akin to seeing bunny rabbits in the clouds than anything real on the Shroud. The Shroud has been photographed so many times for anything to suddenly be found at this late date is patently absurd... and in fact it is a rehash of claims from 1978!

The Shroud was made on a Wall Loom... and it was hank bleached. Soapwort fullered. Hand spun. All things done in the 1st Century and most likely not done in the medieval times when more modern weaving would have been the norm.

In addition there are many extant examples of three over one twill weavings from the period. I don't know where this idea that complex weaving only came about in the medieval period. The Egyptians were fine weavers as were the East Indians, the Chinese, and indeed the people of Palestine area.

There are other fine examples of the weavers art from the 1st Century that are extremely rare... such as examples of the rarest cloth in the world: byssus, which is native to the Eastern Mediterranean that still exist, that have been found in Egypt and Roman burials.

Can’t wait to share that with my daughter (pinged above) who greatly enjoys *conversations* with atheists... It tickles her to no end when she can point out flaws in their arguments. She’s going to LOVE using this line of debate, I just KNOW it! Thanks! :)

it is easier to worship items like pieces of cloth or images showing up on toast instead of just having true faith and not needing to worship items

I don't begrudge people whatever crutch they need to believe in God. It is the effort and the desire that God cares about, and while yes it is true that a man who needs no proof of God's existence or Jesus' life and resurrection in order to truly believe has a stronger faith than someone who looks for the physical evidence that Jesus may have left behind. But when it comes down to it I think as long as people strive to be good, to follow Christ's path of humility, love, and devotion to God, then how someone comes to their faith is less important than how they live their faith.

132
posted on 12/17/2009 10:51:04 AM PST
by coconutt2000
(NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))

I didnt say a thing about Catholics. I didnt even think about Catholics. Nobody was bashed until some thin skins got irritated by their imaginations.

I would say that referring to a relic venerated by Catholics as a 'souvenir' gives me a pretty good indication of the 'mindset' of the commenter. Isn't a souvenir akin to some cheesy piece of schlock manufactured to give the tourist a cheap memory of a place or experience?

Say what you will, but I think if you examine your conscience you will find a deep seated dislike for the Church (Universal).

140
posted on 01/05/2010 6:42:29 AM PST
by grammarman
(We could all get along if only we would all agree with you.)

I’m not really into cheap do-dads, so they weren’t on my mind when I posted. Our Lord rebuked the Pharisees for asking for a physical sign of his divinity (Matt. 16:1-4). When I read of relics, including the shroud, I recall His words.

We are to live by faith, which means being sure of what we believe without needing physical artifacts to “remember” — i.e. “souvenirs.” (Hebrews 10:35- 11:3 ff).

Assuming you’re a Christian, we’re on the same side, so take a deep breath, calm down, and have a happy new year.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.